Liberty - full article

America’s New Law - The Law of Liberty

Needless to say, if Liberty was to be America’s new secular religion, then America would need a new secular law based upon Liberty.  The American Constitution became America’s “New Law of Liberty”. 

            This new law of Liberty meant liberty from all laws that opposed the goals of America’s Founding Fathers, including liberty from God’s laws and England’s laws.  The Founding Fathers not only wanted freedom from England’s laws, they wanted freedom from the teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ – the only faultless “Law of Liberty”.  The perfect law of liberty in Scripture (James 1:25, 2:12) refers to the New Covenant, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the law by which all men of this age will be judged (Rom 2:16).

            America’s new law of liberty, the American Constitution, is imperfect at best having evolved from the writings of twenty-three lawmakers, mostly pagans, whose writings were considered authoritative by American lawmakers.  To acknowledge their contribution to the development of the American Constitution, portraits of these twenty-three lawmakers were placed over the gallery doors of the House of Representatives in their honor.    

While righteous Moses was included in the twenty-three, Jesus Christ was not.  This is interesting given that Jesus Christ and the Gospel, which is the perfect law of liberty, replaced the imperfect and faulty Law of Moses (Hebrews 7:12, 8:6-7).  Therefore, since there was a change in the law (Heb 7:12) under the New Covenant based upon better promises (Heb 7:22), then it seems that our Founding Fathers would have considered the teachings of Jesus Christ more authoritative and beneficial to the well being of America than even those of Moses.  Such was not the case.

While America’s lawmakers excluded the teachings of Jesus Christ, they considered the codes of a pagan king of Babylon to be significant to the evolution of the American Constitution.  The Codes of Hammurabi were developed by King Hammurabi who believed that Babylon was under the rule of the pagan gods and that the god, Marduk, had called him as his earthly representative to govern both the land and the people.   Scripture clearly reveals that the spirits behind these pagan gods do indeed rule over geographical areas and have human representatives that maintain places of worship for them (Jeremiah 49:1-3, 48:7; Judges 11:23-24; Daniel 10:13-21).  However, the Lord had this to say about the Kings of Babylon and Marduk:

“This is the Word the LORD spoke through Jeremiah the prophet concerning Babylon and the land of the Babylonians.  Announce and proclaim among the nations, lift up a banner and proclaim it; keep nothing back, but say, Babylon will be captured; Bel will be put to shame, Marduk filled with terror.  Her images will be put to shame and her idols filled with terror.” (Jer 50:1-2, NIV)

The Hammurabi Code was found engraved in rock with a relief of Hammurabi portrayed receiving the laws from the sun god – the god of Justice.  Interestingly, this concept was embraced by America’s lawmakers as well.  On the north side of the marble base of a monument to Chief Justice John Marshall, there is “a panel in relief, ‘Minerva Dictating the Constitution to Young America’.  A companion panel on the south side, ‘Victory Leading Young America to Swear Fidelity at the Altar of the Union’ is depicted…” [9]  To acknowledge King Hammurabi is consistent with the Founding Father’s belief that the gods were involved in the everyday lives of men. 

The authors of the American Constitution left no doubt as to where they stood concerning Christianity.  The message to the Christian community was clear:  America was founded on Liberty and America had been liberated from Christianity.  Again, the most that the Constitution offered Christianity was that Christianity, like all other religions, would be tolerated.

Even today, this concept continues to be echoed in America.  Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee for president in the 2008 presidential election, delivered a speech in 2006 to a group of Christian leaders that echoes the ideology of America’s Founding Fathers:  the acceptance of all religions. 

“In the speech, Obama argued for religious diversity and acceptance and prodded liberals not to cede issues of faith to Republicans.  ‘Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation and a nation of nonbelievers,’ Obama said.  ‘And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?  Would we go with James Dobson’s, or Al Sharpton’s?’  … In response to Obama’s contention that religious voters had an obligation to ‘translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values,’ Dobson asked:  ‘Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of tiny babies?’” [10] (emphasis added)

While this attitude would be expected of a non-believer or a civil government, the context of his speech is disturbing because he is a professing Christian.  While we are to live at peace with everyone, Christians are not to place other beliefs on the same level as Christianity.  Jesus Christ is the Way and the only way!  It is our responsibility as Christians to speak the truth that sets people free, which is that Jesus Christ is the Way and the only way to salvation.   

Not only does Barack Obama echo the beliefs of America’s Founding Fathers, but sadly, there are Christian pastors who also share the same belief that Christians should accept the beliefs of other religions as well as non-believers.  The following quote is from an article titled, “Pastors Focus on Faith, Morals in Private Meeting”, as reported by The Washington Post concerning a private meeting between Barack Obama and Christian Pastors who are considered to be leaders within the Christian Community:

“When Sen. Barack Obama held a recent closed-door meeting with an A-list assortment of Christian leaders, the majority of the time was spent discussing abortion, homosexuality and the Democrat’s faith.  That focus didn’t please some participants who had flown to Chicago hoping to also talk about domestic and foreign policy matters.  ‘They focused on abortion, gay marriage, and then Franklin Graham tried to get Senator Obama saved,’ said the Rev. Eugene Rivers of Boston.  Rivers, who was representing the presiding bishop of the Church of God in Christ, … said Graham asked about the Illinois senator’s Christian conversion and his father’s connections to Islam.  Rivers, who supports Obama, said the senator said of his father:  ‘The least of the things he was was Islamic.’  When asked about whether he believed Jesus is the only way to salvation, ‘Obama said, brilliantly, ‘Jesus is the only way for me.  I’m not in a position to judge other people,’” Rivers recalled.  The Rev. Romal Tune, a Washington pastor … said Graham’s line of questioning was inappropriate for a politician running to represent a religiously pluralistic country.  ‘The elephant in the room with that question is the condemnation of people of other faiths and of no faith.  What is that question saying about the rest of society and God’s judgment on them?’ said Tune, who did not attend the meeting.”[11] (emphasis added)

King David cried out to the Lord because he found himself in a situation where he realized that no man cared for his soul.

“I looked on my right hand, and beheld, but there was no man that would know me: refuge failed me; no man cared for my soul.” (Psalm 142:4, KJV)

Reverend Graham was the one pastor in attendance who cared enough about Obama’s salvation to ask him the most important question that we as Christians can ask anyone.  Yet, he was rebuked by other Christian pastors who were more interested in Obama’s politics than his salvation or the salvation of others.

The same satanic spirits operating behind the goddess Liberty that Jefferson and Washington built a temple to, continue to operate over America opposing the precepts of God and Christianity at all levels of government.  Sadly, this is operating within the Christian church as well. 

Psalm 2 speaks to this very situation.  The heathen rulers of the earth take counsel together against the Lord and His son, Jesus Christ.  They imagine that they can devise a plan to be free from God’s government and His Word.  They may set themselves against the Lord and His anointed, but God’s purposes will not be thwarted by any man or the principalities that operate through them.  Scripture reveals that the government rests on the shoulders of Jesus Christ (Isaiah 9) and His kingdom and His government will be established in the Millennial Age (Revelation 20).  The Son Himself warns that unless they submit to His authority they will perish.

            America’s Founding Fathers may have taken counsel among themselves and devised plans that they thought would break the bands and cords of Christianity from them as well as all of America.  However, the plans of the heathen are only vain imaginations and will never prevail. 

Jefferson and Washington wanted to be free from the bands and cords of Christianity,  which included being liberated from England’s government that officially recognized Christianity as their state religion.  Therefore, they rebelled against England’s monarchy even though it had been established by the authority of God.         

Scripture reveals that every form of government exists by the authority of God (Romans 13).  Just as democracy exists by the authority of God, monarchies and dictatorships exist by the authority of God as well.

During the lifetime of Jesus Christ, Israel was under the oppressive rule of the Roman government.  Even though Jesus made it perfectly clear to Pilate that he had no power over Him, neither Jesus nor His disciples ever attempted to overthrow the civil government.  Even when the chief priests, rulers and the people of Israel falsely accused Jesus of inciting the people to rebellion, Pilate and Herod found no basis for their charges.  

“Pilate called together the chief priests, the rulers and the people, and said to them, ‘You brought me this man as one who was inciting the people to rebellion.  I have examined him in your presence and have found no basis for your charges against him.  Neither has Herod, for he sent him back to us; as you can see, he has done nothing to deserve death.” (Luke 23:13-15, NIV, emphasis added)

Without hesitating, Jesus Christ submitted to the authority of the dictatorship of the Roman government, even to the point of going to the cross.  Why?  Because the Roman government existed by the authority of God.  Jesus never attempted to thwart the purposes of God the Father or the power that God gave Pilate to crucify Him.   He willingly came to do the will of His father.       

“And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer.  Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?  Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.” (John 19:9-11, KJV, emphasis added)

Four hundred years have passed since America rebelled against England’s government.  Yet, like their forefathers, many politicians still have the mistaken belief that America has the responsibility to rise up against countries when they disagree with their form of government even though those governments exist by the authority of God.  Whether they understand or not, when they interfere with governments that exist by the authority of God, they are rebelling against God.   

September 11, 1787

It was on September 11, 1787 that James Wilson, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, prophesied that the new federal government would “lay a foundation for erecting temples of liberty in every part of the earth”.[12]   Interestingly, September 11^th corresponds to the day and month that terrorist attacked America in 2001.

Because America is attempting to fulfill this  prophecy of establishing “liberty” in all parts of the earth, on September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against America began and they will continue as long as America interferes with governments that exist by the authority of God.  Muslims are fighting back because their religious beliefs are everything to the Nations of Islam.  They are resisting a democracy that would change that. 

If “liberty”, as defined by America, is established in their countries, they understand that liberty would become their new secular religion and the Koran would no longer be their ultimate source of authority.  Muslims do not want to be liberated from Islam and the teachings of the Koran. Liberty threatens the very existence of Islam, beliefs that they and their forefathers have fought for since the early seventh century and will continue to fight for – hence their holy wars. 

Islam and their government are opposed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ; yet, God still has His purposes for this remembering that His ways and thoughts are not those of man.  Our battle is to be fought in the spiritual realm.  It is not a matter of a democratic form of government replacing the governments of Muslim nations.  The spiritual battle is much more multifaceted than a democratic form of government being the all-in-all.  You cannot fight a spiritual battle with carnal ideology. 

Christians living in America may not even agree with our own civil government and find themselves asking, Can anything good come from the civil government?  The answer is yes.  However, why would the Lord command us to submit to a civil government made up principally of unbelievers?  The reason lies with the heart.

Scripture reveals that pagans know right from wrong for the same reason that Christians do:  the Lord has written it on all our hearts and has equipped each of us with a conscience to carry out that law (Rom 2:12-15).  Each of us have the choice as to how we will respond to what is written on our hearts, which explains why some unbelievers keep the law, why some believers don’t keep the law, and why some Christian lawmakers make laws contrary to what pleases the Lord.

Because God wrote the Law on everyone’s heart, the unbeliever is equipped to make just laws accordingly and can apply this when making laws that protect our society.  Whether the understanding of the Law on someone’s heart is from his knowledge of Scripture or simply from his sense of right and wrong (conscience), the important thing is that in either situation, the understanding is from the Lord and for His purposes.

While a Christian has a spiritual understanding of the Law, the unbeliever has only a secular understanding.  Even though the unbeliever doesn’t know who God is or His divine nature, he still knows right from wrong.  This secular understanding of the Law instills within the unbeliever a desire to live in a society governed by laws that produce an environment that is neither chaotic nor overrun by those who have a law unto their own. 

“Moral” laws or “civil” laws don’t mean that they are “righteous” laws.  They are simply laws that provide guidelines to ensure the peace and welfare of law-abiding citizens.  However, we are not to be influenced by the laws made by man when they are apart from God, calling good evil and evil good; rather, we are to be obedient to God’s commandments (see Acts 5:29, 4:19). 

The government rests on the shoulders of Jesus Christ – so why is there a civil government?  The Jewish nation had long awaited prophecy to be fulfilled concerning the coming of their Messiah.  When He came, He would establish His earthly kingdom – a righteous kingdom that would replace the oppressive Roman rule under which they were governed.  However, the religious leaders rejected Jesus Christ and instead, had Him crucified by the civil government from which they wanted to be delivered.  Why?  Simply put, the religious leaders were envious of Jesus and placed their interests above the Lord establishing his Kingdom.  Therefore, until Christ returns at His second coming and establishes His Kingdom we will all be required to submit to the civil government in our respective countries.   

            Like the Sanhedrin who rejected the government of Jesus Christ, Jefferson, Washington and the other Founding Fathers rejected the government of Jesus Christ.  When America’s Constitution was written, Scripture was not considered as authoritative or infallible.

Likewise, many other presidents resisted the idea of Jesus Christ as part of their administration, other than the customary references.  The following is a quote from the December 17, 2007 edition of Newsweek.  

“Fights about faith and politics have been with us always.  In 1800, there were advertisements saying voters could have ‘Adams and God, or Jefferson and no God.’  Andrew Jackson resisted the formation of a ‘Christian Party in Politics.’  Abraham Lincoln buried a proposed constitutional amendment designed to declare the nation’s dependence on, and allegiance to, Jesus.”[13]

National gods

Jefferson and Washington knew about the Lord, yet the iconography on Capitol Hill reveals that they forsook the Lord and instead honored the pagan gods much like the nations in ancient Israel who also knew about the Lord (2 Kings 17:28-41).  Even though the people from these various nations were taught about the Lord, they continued to serve their own national gods.  Scripture also reveals that people do indeed forsake God for pagan deities: 

“Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in mine eyes, and to keep my statutes and my judgments, as did David his father.” (1 Kings 11:33, KJV, emphasis added)

While principalities are over all nations in the sense that they are interested in the earthly affairs of mankind, it doesn’t mean that every nation has invoked a principality as their guardian.  However, the iconography at the United States Capitol reveals that principalities were invoked as guardians over America. 

            Scripture reveals that when Satan usurped man’s dominion in the garden of Eden, the earth came under his dominion and for the present age, he is god of this world (Matt 4:8-9, 12:24-30; John 12:31; 2 Cor 4:4).  Nonetheless, as Christians we have been given the authority to take that dominion back (2 Cor 10:4; Luke 10:17-19).

When Satan fell, one third of the angels, known as principalities, fell with him and many of these principalities are geographical in nature.  These geographical principalities or guardians can be understood according to Daniel 10, which reveals their existence and some of their nature.  For example, Gabriel, the angel who stands in the presence of God (Luke 1:19), was sent with a message to Daniel in answer to Daniel’s prayer.  However, he was detained by the Prince of Persia, a geographic principality, for twenty-one days.  Only when Michael, the guardian archangel of Israel (Dan 10:21, 12:1), came to help him was he able to reach earth (Dan 10:12-13).

“One Out of Many – Out of Many, One”

The satanic spirits operating behind Liberty that Jefferson and Washington built a “Temple of Liberty” in honor of are the geographical principalities over America.  They will continue to operate over America opposing the precepts of God and Christianity at all levels of government.  These satanic spirits are at times portrayed as “one out of many” as well as “out of many, one”. 

In his heart Satan said that he would be like God (Isa 14:13-14).  Therefore, because God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are One (1John 5:7), we should not be surprised that Satan’s counterfeit of “one” were composites of multiple gods portrayed as one.  The goddess, Liberty, eventually became a composite of various other gods and goddesses, including their various forms of worship.  This coalition is summoned up in the motto on the Great Seal of the United States:  E pluribus unum meaning, “One Out of Many” or “Out of Many, One”.  

            Atop the Capitol’s dome, Liberty stands on an orb inscribed with E pluribus unum and inside the Capitol’s Rotunda, she is portrayed seated alongside George Washington in The Apotheosis of Washington, which also bears the inscription E pluribus unum.  As the dome was considered the focal point of the Capitol, there is much to learn from its design and iconography.  Therefore, let’s begin with The Apotheosis of Washington

The Apotheosis of Washington

            The Apotheosis of Washington is the most important feature of the Capitol’s Rotunda.  It is an allegorical painting over the eye of the dome as seen from inside the Rotunda and portrays historical figures of American leadership combined with those of pagan deities.  For example, Washington is deified as a triune god, including the personification of the god Jupiter,[14] the Persian god, Mithra, and as a god himself in human form.  Washington is surrounded by numerous other deities, including a composite of Minerva, Liberty,[15] Bellona,[16] and Mithra, seated to his right, a composite of Victory, Fame[17] and Juno seated to his left, and finally, the goddess directly beneath Washington was a composite of America and Freedom [18].  As composites, the deities can be understood as One deity Out of Many as well as Many deities Out of One.  

“The focal point of the great Rotunda is the canopy of the dome where the fresco, ‘The Apotheosis of George Washington,’ may be seen 180 feet above the Rotunda floor. … It is an allegorical painting which combines mythological and historical figures.  In the center, Washington apotheosized, is seated in majesty.  On his right is the Goddess of Liberty and on his left is a winged figure, symbolic of Victory and Fame, sounding a trumpet.”[19] (emphasis added)

“The iconography of the canopy fresco, with its conjunctions of deities and humans, may seem strange to us today.  However, in the mid-nineteenth century the personification of abstract ideas by means of figures drawn from classical mythology and the association of historical figures such as George Washington and Benjamin Franklin with these was part of the cultural vocabulary.  The gods and goddesses stood allegorically for universal virtues embodied in popular historical personalities.  Thus Washington sits enthroned in the pose of all-powerful Jupiter, …”[20] (emphasis added)

            The Apotheosis of Washington is an excellent example of the double use of iconography.

What is Revealed:  the theme of gods and goddess are not generally viewed as out of the ordinary, rather, they are accepted as part of secular history and are commonplace – harmless so to speak.  As a result, the public would not object to Washington being defied as a god or portrayed as the human representative of the pagan god Jupiter.  Rather than be offensive The Apotheosis of Washington would be accepted at face value: a beautiful work of art, but meaningless in nature.  That is exactly what was meant to be conveyed to those they felt could not even begin to grasp the deeper things of the spiritual realm (i.e., meaningless and harmless in nature).

What is Concealed:  On the other hand, antiquity appealed to the intellect of Jefferson and Washington who believed that as intelligent men they understood what the common people did not: the deeper things of the spiritual realm, which are nothing more than “Satan’s so-called deep secrets” (Rev 2:24).       As a result, our Founding Fathers as well as the general public were under deception.  The public did not understand the true intentions of Jefferson and Washington.  Then again, Jefferson and Washington didn’t understand the wiles of the enemy; they themselves were under self-deception.

“Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.  Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.” (Rom 1:21-23, KJV, emphasis added)

In The Apotheosis of Washington, they changed the glory and majesty of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and animals.  The following is a picture of The Apotheosis of Washington [21] in its entirety.  As we go along, several close-ups will be included as well.

In his heart, Satan said that he would be like God (Isa 14:13-14).  Therefore, because God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are One (1 John 5:7), we should not be surprised that Satan’s counterfeit of “One” were composites of multiple gods portrayed as one, as can be seen from inside the Rotunda as well as atop the Capitol’s dome. 

The focal point of the dome viewed from outside is a statue of the goddess, Liberty, atop an orb that reads E pluribus Unum.  The focal point of the dome as seen from inside the Rotunda is The Apotheosis of Washington with its only inscription:  E pluribus Unum.  In addition to the portrayal of composites in The Apotheosis of Washington, the thirteen goddesses surrounding Washington, three of which are shown below, [22] are symbolic of “many”, but at the same time, holding hands indicates that they are “one”.  The banner they are holding is the focal point and the inscription E Pluribus Unum clearly reinforces that the “Many Out of One” or the “One out of Many” are referring to pagan deities.

           Unquestionably, Jefferson and Washington were as interested in the spirituality embraced by the Romans as they were in their government.  Not only is the design of Capitoline Hill incorporated into the architecture of the United States Capitol, but the religious beliefs of the pagan gods of Capitoline Hill were woven into the Capitol’s iconography as well.  Again, this is significant given that the First Amendment of the Constitution, according to Jefferson, was intended to erect “a wall of separation between church and state” and at the very least prohibits favoritism of one religion over another. 

            The Apotheosis of Washington is just one example where the personal beliefs of Jefferson and Washington continued to be incorporated into the Capitol’s iconography long after their deaths.  Even though Washington had been dead for many years by the time The Apotheosis of Washington had been commissioned, it has been well documented that when planning the United States Capitol that George Washington personally identified with Jupiter and Capitoline Hill.  It was with that understanding that his identity as Jupiter continued to be incorporated into icons portraying him as a god in human form.  Again, The Apotheosis of Washington is only one example that clearly conveys our Founding Fathers reverence to the pagan gods.

It’s important to understand that the objectives for the design of the Capitol were closely guarded and implemented by those political leaders that served after them., as attested to when the “final iconographic decoration” completed in 1916 repeated the same “basic themes first propounded as appropriate in the 1790’s” [23]

“The process of imagining, designing, constructing, and decorating the Capitol occupied statesmen, architects, and artists from 1791 to 1916.  Washington and Jefferson’s idea that the Capitol should convey America’s new political, social, and cultural order was so strong that it survived continual revisions and major additions to the design they had sanctioned in 1793.  Revolutionary-era events provided symbols and allegorical personifications that expressed such concepts as liberty, justice, prosperity, and national union.” [24] (emphasis added)

“Designing the Capitol demonstrated the imperceptible merging of architectural and political interests in 1792 and 1793.  Washington’s and Jefferson’s involvement attests to the Capitol’s significance in their eyes: it must express America’s political ideals while fulfilling Congress’s legislative needs.  Interaction of the country’s most important political leaders with the architects who implemented their joint ideas continued into the Capitol’s construction phase, as successive presidents monitored the work of those charged with carrying out the Thornton-Hallet design.”[25] (emphasis added)

Liberty – One out of Many

            The iconography from early America reveals a great deal about George Washington, who he was, his ideology concerning the founding of America as well as how his contemporaries viewed him.  As mentioned above, the Capitol’s dome is the focal point of the United States Capitol both outside and inside.  The American goddess, Liberty, is the spiritual connection between the two focal points.  Therefore, of Liberty’s many identities, the “many out of one” that we want to explore are her roles as “Liberty” and “Freedom” that link her to the dome.  

Atop the Dome:  In this role, she was originally identified as “Armed Liberty”.  However, she is now more commonly recognized as “Freedom Triumphant in War and Peace”.  She stands atop an orb inscribed with the inscription, E pluribus unum.[26] (see below picture)

Inside the Dome:  In The Apotheosis of Washington, Liberty is portrayed seated alongside George Washington under the banner with the inscription, E pluribus unum.

The following two quotes touch on the representation of Liberty in her role atop the Capitol’s dome as “one god fashioned out of many gods”: 

 “Once again, one single concept was not large enough to encompass the spirit of America, and Crawford combined features associated with Athena, Hercules, Liberty, and America to create a suitable symbol.[27] (emphasis added)

“This third and final version of the dome statue of Liberty addresses concerns about Indians and slavery.  Freedom, according to the artist, remains the focus of the statue, whether in the official title, Statue of Freedom, preferred by the current (1991) Architect of the Capitol, or the more accurate title given by Crawford and used by Jefferson Davis, Armed Liberty, which accurately conflates the two ideas manifest in this combined rendering of Minerva and Liberty.” …    “Jefferson Davis’s rejection of the liberty cap and his recommendation of a ‘helmet’ led to Crawford’s conflation of three traditional allegories:  Liberty, Minerva, and America.”[28] (emphasis added)

As can be seen, Liberty is a composite of at least seven deities:  Liberty, Freedom, Minerva, Mithra, Athena, Hercules and America.  Hence, “One Out of Many” and “Out of Many, One”.

Liberty is also a composite of the different forms of worship associated with each of the deities incorporated into her personification and as a result, she became America’s New Secular Religion.  In other words, out of one religion came many religions.  As a result, America embraces freedom of religion and religious toleration. 

The Center of America

The orb on which Liberty stands ties her to both the heavens and the earth and thus identifies her as the geographical principality who is the guardian deity over America.  As already mentioned, in her role as Minerva she was portrayed as “Minerva, Patroness of American Liberty”.   

The Capitol dome was believed to be the center of America and the focal point of the dome as seen from outside the Rotunda is Liberty atop the Dome’s orb.  Just as the Sovereign Lord set Jerusalem in the center of the nations with countries all around her (Ezekiel 5:5), America’s Founding Fathers considered the Capitol and Washington D.C. as the geographical center of America. 

 “’To found a City in the center of the United States, for the purpose of making it the depository of the acts of the Union … is [to create] a temple erected to liberty.’  The Capitol’s location was in the center of Washington, ‘as the city is the center of The American empire,’ with its streets ‘directed towards every part of America, to enlighten its inhabitants respecting their true interests.’”[29] (emphasis added)

Just as the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord was deposited by Solomon in the temple at Jerusalem (1Kings 8:1-6), the Capitol, America’s temple to Liberty, was described as the “ark of the American covenant”:

“Henry James, writing in The American Scene, perceptively described the Capitol as the ‘ark of the American covenant, … as a compendium of all the national terms and standards, weights and measures and emblems of greatness and glory …’” [30] (emphasis added)

Revered as a temple and considered the center of America, as well as the ark of the American covenant, leaves no doubt that the Founding Fathers viewed all aspects of the Capitol as being sacred.  This would explain why the dome of the Capitol was considered the key most crucial to the planning of the Capitol.  For that reason, The Apotheosis of Washington, which is at the center of the Capitol’s Rotunda, is the key of keys to understanding the hidden meanings of the Capitol’s iconography.     

In ancient times, the dome of a temple was symbolic of the heavens.  Whatever icon was portrayed in the dome and elsewhere in the temple identified the ruling gods over that particular geographical area.  These “centers” were considered “focal points” because they were believed to be geographical areas where the natural was linked to the spiritual realms.  For that reason, these particular geographical areas became sacred meeting places.  

The orb that Liberty stands on indicates that our Founding Fathers also viewed America as the center of the world with Liberty the vital link between the gods and America.  The orb is also key to understanding the identity of one of the more significant principalities that was incorporated into America’s rendering of Liberty, yet has remained hidden over the years:  Mithra, a military deity and god of the covenant.   

Of his many attributes, when Mithra was portrayed standing on an orb, he was portrayed with the head of a lion.  This would explain why part of Liberty’s headdress includes the paws of a lion hanging over both sides of her face.  (see below picture[31]) 

The masculine attributes of Mithra were also incorporated into Liberty’s personification, which makes her an androgynous god, both sexes, male and female, united into one.  This merger of male and female is the perversion of Genesis 2:21-24.  When a man and woman married, they were to become one, forming an inseparable union.  The spiritual merger of male and female principalities was symbolic of this unity between a man and woman becoming one – an inseparable union – again, one out of many and many out of one.

Details of The Apotheosis of Washington

We have just discussed the focal point of the Capitol dome as viewed from the outside.  We now want to look at the focal point of the dome as seen from inside the Rotunda, The Apotheosis of Washington, which is located directly underneath Liberty atop the Dome.  As seen in the following diagram[32] (which has been annotated for clarity), the goddess Liberty is positioned directly above The Apotheosis of Washington, which identifies her as both a geographical principality and a ruling principality over America.  As such, every deity located beneath her, including Washington deified, is under her dominion.   

It has already been pointed out that in addition to being the only inscription in The Apotheosis of Washington, the same concept of E pluribus unum was incorporated into its iconography.  The thirteen goddesses surrounding Washington are symbolic of many, yet at the same time, holding hands indicating that they are one (referring to pagan deities).  Liberty, in addition to being portrayed seated alongside Washington holding a copy of the Constitution, is portrayed in other scenes of the canopy in her roles as “Armed Freedom” and Minerva, all part of “America’s Capitol Hill Triad” – again E Plurbis Unum.   

The following picture is of a close-up of Washington, Liberty and Victory seated alongside one another in The Apotheosis of Washington.  Liberty is wearing Mithra’s Phrygian Cap, known in America as the Liberty Cap.  As the Phrygian Cap was one of Mithra’s main symbols, we know that Mithra has been incorporated into this personification of Minerva/Armed Liberty atop the dome’s orb. 

The Capitol Triad

In ancient Rome, Jupiter was worshipped alongside the goddesses Juno and Minerva at their temple on Capitoline Hill.  It was the worship of these three together that came to be known as the Capitoline triad.  This concept was transferred to America’s own “Capitol Triad”: Washington, Liberty and Victory as portrayed in The Apotheosis above seated alongside one another.   

The following is a picture of The Apotheosis of Washington in its entirety, annotated to highlight the rainbow upon which Washington sits.    

The symbolism of the three seated directly over the rainbow is key to the spiritual interpretation of allegory of The Apotheosis of Washington and the inscription, E Plurbis Unum.  Of Mithra’s many manifestations, it was when he was portrayed seated over a rainbow that he was identified as “god of the covenant” – the mediator between men and the gods.  Therefore, Washington seated over the rainbow conveys the idea that as the human representative of Mithra, Washington was acting as a mediator on behalf of the gods who had entered into a “spiritual covenant” with mankind.  The gods surrounding Washington were witnesses to the covenant. 

Scripture reveals that a cord of three strands is not easily broken (Eccl 4:12).  Whether it was Rome’s Capitoline Hill Triad or Washington’s Capitol Hill Triad, the triad gods can be understood in terms of a “triple braided cord”.  All three deities seated directly over the rainbow indicate that all three were involved in the covenant between man and the spiritual realm.  Coming together as a triple braided cord meant that the covenant would not be easily broken.  This “spiritual covenant” pertains to the copy of the Constitution of the United States that Liberty is holding. 

The idea that Minerva and Liberty had a bearing on America’s Constitution from its inception is supported elsewhere.  As previously mentioned, one such example is the portrayal of Minerva dictating the Constitution to Young America and Victory leading Young America to swear fidelity at the altar of the Union inscribed around the base of a statue in honor of Chief Justice John Marshall.

Even though all three of these gods are seated alongside one another, they are not all equal.  There is a chain of command within the dominion of a principality; therefore, the positioning and posture of the gods in relationship to one another is significant. 

Minerva is seated shoulder to shoulder with Washington while Victory is seated slightly below the two.  Minerva is seated to the right denoting the place of honor.  Washington’s right foot is pointed towards Victory, indicating that she is seated at the foot of Washington.  (See the article on We the People of the United States of America) 

When Washington points to the Constitution, he is directing our attention to Liberty as well as to the Constitution.  Liberty, not Washington, is the one who is holding the Constitution and Washington acknowledges his regard for this particular deity, which links the American Constitution to the spiritual realm and to a spiritual covenant.  In return, Liberty sets her eyes towards Washington, yet Victory, who sits at the foot of Washington, looks away from him.  The symbolism here is of a man going into covenant with pagan gods and even more significant, is that the man was the first president of the United Sates.

Covenants and Pagan Deities

The worship of pagan gods was and is not just a meaningless tradition of man carried over from antiquity.  It was a bona fide religion.  The spirits that operate behind these pagan deities are the angels that fell when Satan fell.  As previously mentioned, Scripture clearly reveals that these pagan gods rule over geographical areas and have human representatives that maintain places of worship for them.

The Apotheosis of Washington reveals that the first President of the United States, like the Roman Senators of antiquity, went into covenant with these principalities.  The United States Capitol was and is a place of worship for these same principalities and there are those who knowingly continue to maintain the Capitol as a temple in reverence of these pagan deities.  Not only did Jefferson and other lawmakers of America want to meet on a hill symbolic of the hill where Rome’s lawmakers met, it is obvious they also wanted to honor the Roman lawmaker’s reverence to the pagan gods of Capitoline Hill.

Capitoline Hill was at the very center of Rome’s political and religious existence.   The lawmakers identified with the pagan gods and worshipped them accordingly.  One did not exist apart from the other.  Lawmakers were known to have taken their vows in front of Jupiter who was concerned with oaths, treaties and leagues.  Likewise, George Washington and the other American patriots were also portrayed taking an oath before Jupiter.

“The iconography of the panels decorating the south wing (which was to contain the House of Representatives) is derived from the most powerful ancient god, Jupiter, … In the central panel, a single standing figure (representing either collective American patriots or Washington) takes an oath before the seated Jupiter … king of the gods in Roman mythology … Oaths in ancient Rome were taken at the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, located on the Capitoline hill.” [33]

However, Scripture clearly warns man not to make covenants with pagan deities. 

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was very clear that the Israelites were not to make covenants with either the pagans or their gods:  

“Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods.  They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me: for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee.” (Ex 23:32-33, KJV, emphasis added)

“That ye come not among these nations, these that remain among you; neither make mention of the name of their gods, nor cause to swear by them, neither serve them, nor bow yourselves unto them” (Joshua 23:7, KJV)

Nonetheless, the Israelites entered into covenants with the pagan gods, among them “Baal-berith”, the Canaanite “god of covenants and oaths” (Judges 8:33, 9:4, 46).  The angels that fell with Satan are the satanic spirits operating behind  Baal-berith and the other deities that the pagans worshipped as their gods.  Baal-berith, as well as all other Baals, are the ruling principalities within the hierarchy of the fallen angels.  The iconography at the Capitol suggests that America’s Founding Fathers entered into covenants with these same pagan gods as well. 

Over time, the worship of Baal-berith found its way into other countries, including Iran and Rome, where this deity was known as Mithra.  Interestingly, Mithraism dates back to Biblical times when Cyrus was king of Persia (modern day Iran) (Ezra 1:8).  The name of Cyrus’s treasurer was “Mithredath”, which meant that he was either “given by Mithra” or “dedicated to Mithra”.  Highly praised as a military deity as well as god of covenants, Mithra along with Jupiter was eagerly embraced by the Roman military as one of their foremost gods.  Obviously, as Jupiter was also a god concerned with covenants, treaties and oaths, somewhere along the way the attributes of Baal-berith became incorporated into Jupiter’s identity as well as that of Mithra.

Finally, the worship of Mithra, like Jupiter, was brought to America where the attributes of these two military deities were combined with the attributes of George Washington, America’s military hero.  As such, they are portrayed as one deity with Washington as their human representative in The Apotheosis of Washington.  This is another example of E pluribus unum:  One out of Many – Many out of One.

In antiquity, Mithraism was Christianity’s main rival.  It is interesting that the symbolism of Mithra, albeit hidden, was incorporated into the images of George Washington defied as a god.  Then again, our forefathers wanted to be “Liberated from Christianity”.   

As in other countries, as the worship of the ancient gods were taken from one country to another and given new names, America’s forefathers renamed the ancient gods with names that Americans could identify with.  However, the manner in how one change came about is most surprising.  When Washington was portrayed as the human representative of the pagan gods Jupiter and Mithra, over time his identity became more prominent than that of either Mithra or Jupiter.  He was no longer only seen as a “representation” of a pagan god – he was viewed as a god.  In other words, Mithra and Jupiter became “Americanized” through the image of George Washington.

The Pagan’s Symbolism of the Rainbow

Interestingly, the worship of Mithra was later embraced by the Freemasons.  As a Freemason, George Washington would have participated in the many rituals that revolved around this particular principality.  As both a soldier and a Freemason, Washington would have held this particular deity in the highest regard. 

Of Mithra’s many attributes, it was when he was portrayed seated over a rainbow that he was identified as “god of the covenant”, the “mediator between men and the gods”.[34]  Therefore, Washington seated over the rainbow conveys the idea that as the human representative of Mithra, Washington was acting as a mediator on behalf of the gods who had entered into a “spiritual covenant” with mankind.  The gods surrounding Washington were witness to the covenant.  Washington, as a military deity, was god of the covenant.  The pagan’s perversion of God’s rainbow as a sign of the Noahic covenant (Gen 9:12-17) was only one expression of these satanic spirits.  Another was the color, purple.

The Pagan’s Symbolism of Purple

Purple in the Bible was symbolic of royalty and majesty.  Just as the pagans misused the rainbow for their own purposes, they dedicated the color purple to Jupiter and wore purple as a symbol of their reverence to Jupiter.  According to Dr. Rex R. Hutchens, a 33^rd degree Freemason and author of A Glossary to Morals and Dogma,

“As Pike notes, the ziggurat of Borsippa had seven stages of different colors.  These colors were dedicated to the seven ‘planets’ known to Babylonia: … the third was purple, for Jupiter”[35] (emphasis added)

Knowing that George Washington was the human representative of the Roman god Jupiter, then it is understandable why he was portrayed as a military deity dressed in the color dedicated to Jupiter – “purple” (sometimes referred to as lavender, a shade of purple).  As a Freemason, George Washington would have been aware that the color purple was associated with Jupiter and that would explain why he introduced and designed America’s first military medal out of purple cloth. 

The Purple Heart, America’s first military medal “for military merit”, was sewn on the military uniform of courageous soldiers at the request of Washington.  That he chose purple as the color for a medal alone does not support that he was associated with the practice of pagan gods.  However, when we look at his life as a whole, it’s obvious that not only was he knowledgeable of paganism, but that he also embraced pagan beliefs.

The Pagan’s Symbolism of Jacob’s Ladder

The pagans also misused the account of the ladder in Jacob’s dream that reached from earth to heaven with the angels of God ascending and descending on it (Genesis 28:12).  Their corruption was the “Borsippa”, mentioned above and the “Mirthriac Ladder”.

The initiates of Mithra were required to ascend the Mithriac Ladder, which consisted of seven steps.  The first step of the ladder was symbolic of earth with the seventh step symbolic of the heavens.  To advance from one step of the ladder to the next indicated that they were spiritually advancing toward heaven.  Each step of the ladder of initiation was under the protection of one of the corresponding seven planets.  That Jupiter presided over the fourth step of the Mithriac Ladder further supports the connection between the two deities. 

The following portrayal of George Washington further supports that Jupiter became “Americanized” through the image of George Washington.  Rembrandt Peale, who personally met George Washington, painted one of the two most famous portraits of Washington in existence:  “Pater Patriae” as shown below.

The last time that Washington sat for an artist before his death was for Peale.  As a contemporary of that period of time, Peale personally understood the ideology of the Founding Fathers and it was with that understanding that Peale portrayed George Washington in the posthumous portrait, Pater Patriae, as the earthly representative of Jupiter.[36]

The objective of Peale’s picture was to leave people with the impression of the idea that Washington was a god.  Peale’s portrait was only meant to be a “likeness” of George Washington.  Subtle changes were made to show a resemblance between Washington and Jupiter.  For example, the resemblance of Washington’s nose and broad forehead with that of Jupiter was meant to identify Washington as Jupiter’s earthly representative. 

Peale meant to convey the idea accepted by himself and others that George Washington was the human counterpart to the pagan god Jupiter, the “father of the gods” and as such, Washington was the “father of men”.  Washington became known as the father of America because of those who believed that he was the earthly representative of the “father of the gods”.

Jupiter’s head is placed above Washington’s head to symbolize the relationship between man and pagan deity.  As father of the gods, Jupiter’s head was placed above Washington’s head to symbolize his position in the heavens, while Washington’s authority is linked to the earth, subordinate to Jupiter. 

The objective of Peale’s picture was to leave people with the impression of the idea of who Washington was.  To connect Washington to Jupiter would succeed in connecting Washington and all of America to the Roman Republic, their ideals and their reverence for the pagan gods and goddesses that so heavily influenced Washington.  

That a human being was and is a god in human form is still embraced by the Tibetans who believe that their spiritual leader, the Dali Lama, is a god incarnate.  Interestingly, in October 2007, America’s lawmakers awarded the Dali Lama with their highest civilian award – the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal.  Alongside Congress, President Bush honored the Dali Lama for being a man of peace and for supporting religious freedom.  That the Dali Lama believes he is a god incarnate was not offensive to America’s lawmakers.  Then again, that belief was woven into America’s secular foundation.  It was not offensive to those lawmakers who believed that George Washington was a god incarnate either.  As another example, during World War II, Japanese considered their Emperor as a god incarnate. 

Minerva

As already noted, the themes that were incorporated throughout the design and iconography of the Capitol were subject matters decided upon by Jefferson and Washington.   The following picture of George Washington’s personal “water-mark” [37] supports that Washington was personally knowledgeable of the “pagan goddess Minerva who was Americanized as Liberty.  Washington’s watermark places an emphasis on the Liberty Cap (Phrygian cap), which suggests that Washington meant to honor Mithra as well as Liberty, the Phrygian cap being one of the main attributes of the pagan god Mithra, one of the principle gods of Freemasonry.

The goddess Victory

Like Minerva and Washington, the goddess seated to the left of Washington is a war deity.  Her symbolism alongside Washington implies that it was through the spirit operating behind Victory that America would gain its victories. 

Just as America’s Liberty is a composite of more than just one pagan god, Victory is a composite of at least four pagan deities:  Victory, Nike, Fame and Juno.  These four spirits all are associated with war and even though they have different manifestations, they operate together as a braided cord.  There is also at least one other principality incorporated into the personification of Victory (see the article titled We the People of the United States of America).

 Ancient icons that have survived portray Minerva holding a small statue of Nike (Victory) in her hand, which explains why Minerva portrayed as Liberty and Victory are seated on either side of George Washington in The Apotheosis of Washington.  That Minerva is holding Victory indicates Victory’s subordination to Minerva.  As Minerva’s subordinate, Victory would support Minerva, the war goddess, in her quest to be victorious in battle.  The spirit behind the concept of Victory is to be victorious in war and as the goddess of victory, she came to be an everlasting symbol of victory and dominance on the battlefields of ancient Greece (see the article titled We the People of the United States of America for a fuller description of Victory and her role in America).

The Greek word for “overcome” in the Bible is “nike”.  For example,

“For whatsoever is born of God overcometh ^[G3528] the world: and this is the victory ^[G3529] that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?” (1John 5:4-5, KJV)

            The New Testament was written in Greek and the word “overcome” in the Bible is the Greek word nikao.  Strong’s Concordance defines overcome as coming from the Greek word nikao, meaning to conquer, overcome, prevail, or get the victory.     

Those who Believe that they are Overcomers in Nike

As Christians we understand that we overcome and are victorious through our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  However, Satan, wanting to be like God, perverted the truth of what it meant to be an overcomer.  He deceived the pagans into believing that they could overcome by worshiping a pagan goddess by the same name, which meant to gain victory and to overcome: Victory/Nike.  Sadly, some pagans who did not believe in Jesus turned to Victory believing that is was through the worship of this deity that they would overcome and be victorious over others. 

Fame, one of the composite goddesses of  Victory has also influenced America.  For example,

“And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.” (Matt 24:6, KJV, emphasis added)

Again, the New Testament was written in Greek, therefore we need to look at the Greek meaning behind the word “rumours” to understand how the spirit behind Fame operates over America.  From Strong’s Concordance:

·         Rumours:  akoe, ^{Greek 189} Strong’s from ^{Greek 191} (akouo); hearing (the act, the sense or the thing heard) :- audience, ear, fame, which ye heard, hearing, preached, report, rumoral

·         akouo, ^{Greek 191} Strong’s; a primary verb; to hear (in various senses) :- give (in the) audience (of), come (to the ears), ([shall]) hear (-er, -ken), be noised, be reported, understand.

As we can see from above, the word “rumours” according to the Greek, means “to hear in various senses”.  One of these ways heard is through a rumor, which includes gossip.  Rumours also can be interpreted as “Fame”.  If we look at the word rumours in its context in Matthew 24:6, we can understand that the spirit that operates behind the pagan goddess, Fame, will manifest through gossip and rumours:  specifically – “rumours of war.”

A Rumor of War – The War in Iraq 

President Bush declared war on Iraq because it was believed that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.  However, no evidence was found that weapons of mass destruction were produced or stockpiled after 1991 when UN sanctions were imposed.  Those weapons that were found were not of much use to Saddam because of their poor conditions.  It turns out that this was only a “rumor”.

            We know from Scripture that people, even Christians, can be influenced by unclean spirits.  When Jesus said to Peter:  “Satan get thee behind me”, He was rebuking both Peter and Satan.  Jesus addressed the principality operating in the spiritual realm who was influencing Peter in the natural realm. 

“But He turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.” (Matt 16:23, KJV, emphasis added)

            Realizing that there is nothing new under the sun, then we shouldn’t be surprised that on September 10, 2007 that many of our Senators and Congressmen, including many Christians, were influenced by the same demonic spirits that were operating behind Jupiter.  These same spirits had influence over George Washington and the Senators and Congressman who approved of George Washington being portrayed as Jupiter.    

This brings us to General David Petraeus, commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, who like the ancient Roman generals, was received on Capitol Hill with all the fanfare of a Roman Triumph.  In ancient Rome, a general returning from battle would appear in front of the senate on Capitoline Hill to receive honor and to honor the god Jupiter.   The procession leading to the Senate was known as the Roman Triumph.

Scripture speaks of the “sins of our forefathers”.  Their belief in foreign gods has given those spirits operating behind Jupiter as well as other deities the legal right to exert their influence over America.    

According to news accounts, General Petraeus was received with all the honor of a Roman triumph.  His arrival to appear before the U.S. Senate was America’s equivalent to the Roman Triumph.  Following is an account of General Petraeus’ arrival to Capitol Hill as reported in The Washington Post.

“The best historical analog for Gen. David Petraeus’s appearance before Congress yesterday might be found in the days of the Roman Republic.  Then, returning generals wearing laurel wreaths and purple robes and riding in chariots were greeted at the city gate by senators and led through a ‘Triumph’ ceremony that included trumpeters and the slaying of white bulls.  There were no animal sacrifices in the Cannon Caucus Room yesterday, but Petraeus – even the name is a felicitous echo of the Latin ‘patronus’ (protector) – enjoyed the modern equivalent: … It was, in all, a welcome befitting a Roman general.  Better, even:  Petraeus didn’t even have to endure, as Roman generals did, the slave holding the crown over his head and whispering in his ear:  Sic transit gloria mundi.  All glory is fleeting.” [38]

Victory is in Jesus

It is true that “all glory is fleeting” for those who fight battles apart from the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  For those who are fighting battles in the name of pagan gods or under their influence, all glory is fleeting!  Our Victory is in Jesus Christ who Triumphed over all Principalities and Powers – including Jupiter of Capitoline Hill.

“And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” (Col 2:15, KJV)

The Lord says “thou shalt have no other gods before me”; nonetheless, like the Greeks, many of America’s early forefathers learned the ways of the pagan gods and goddesses.  Our secular Founding Fathers used art, images and statues as a way to communicate their ideas and beliefs.  One only has to look at the art in the United States Capitol, the White House and Washington, D.C. itself to grasp to the degrees that they embraced the pagan gods.  The influence of these spirits is unmistakable in America.

Read the following comments by Vivien Fryd, author of Art and Empire, and then read the statement by President Bush made in 2002 regarding his perception of America’s role in the world.  It is obvious that there is a demonic influence over how some of America’s politicians view America in the grandiose way they do. 

When reading the following comments by Fryd, keep in mind that the goddess pictured to the right of Washington as pictured in The Apotheosis of Washington is Liberty, the composite of Minerva and Liberty.  The statue of Armed Liberty that Fryd refers to is the version of Liberty atop the United States Capitol.

“Freedom, according to the artist, remains the focus of the statue, whether in the official title, Statue of Freedom, preferred by the current (1991) Architect of the Capitol, or the more accurate title given by Crawford and used by Jefferson Davis, Armed Liberty, which accurately conflates the two ideas manifest in this combined rendering of Minerva and Liberty.  … Crawford had earlier chosen a placid image in his Armed Liberty, in part to show that Liberty’s battles had been won in North America, enabling her to stand watch over the Union and the world to enforce her rule by the sword wherever and whenever necessary.[39] (emphasis added)

Now compare Fryd’s comments to the following remarks made by President Bush during an interview with Bob Woodward that reveals President Bush would consider going to war with Afghanistan and Iraq because of what he perceived to be America’s leadership role in the world. 

“President Bush has outlined an expansive, even grandiose, view of the role the United States must play in combating terrorism and tyranny that suggests a tension in his own mind – and the minds of his aides – between the need for international cooperation and the belief that at times this country will have to act alone. …It is perhaps Bush’s most direct statement on the need for unilateral action by the United States as the shaping force in the world. …  ‘As we think through Iraq,’ he said, ‘we may or may not attack.  I have no idea yet.  But it will be for the objective of making the world more peaceful.’ … ‘At this moment in history, if there is a world problem, we’re expected to deal with it, ‘President Bush said in an interview at his ranch in August.  ‘It’s the price of power.  It is the price of where the United States stands.’” [40]

America did invade Iraq.  President Bush’s actions in doing so reveal that he is “adamant” in his beliefs concerning what he perceives to be America’s grandiose role in the world.  Since America’s invasion, Saddam Hussein has been captured and executed and America still “legally” occupies Iraq.  However, as a result, the country of Iran has become a stronger power in the Mideast and is proving to be a nation that no longer feels threatened by America.  More on this point later.

President Bush is not alone nor the first when it comes to being “adamant” in his beliefs – right, wrong or indifferent.

As the Lord’s spokesman to Israel, Ezekiel would have to be bold, unyielding, unwavering, immovable, resolute, steadfast and unconquerable.  To be able to deal with those who had set their foreheads and hearts as an “adamant stone” against the Lord. the Lord made Ezekiel’s forehead as hard as an “adamant stone” as well.

“Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads.  As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house.” (Ezekiel 3:8-9, KJV, emphasis added)

Just as some of the Israelites set their foreheads as an adamant stone against the Lord, others like Ezekiel would set their foreheads as an adamant stone for the Lord.  When it is said of someone that he or she is being "adamant", it is understood that that person is unyielding in his or her opinion; regardless of what others may say, they remain unmovable.  The implication is that when someone is adamant, you may as well give up.  Obviously, this can be either a positive or a negative trait. 

To be adamant for the Lord, like Ezekiel, is a heart attitude and mindset, for which we all should strive.  However, when someone is unyielding concerning beliefs that are opposed to the Lord, then obviously to be adamant in this sense would be a detrimental way of thinking. 

Like our Founding Fathers, America’s political leaders continue to be adamant in how they perceive America’s military and political role in the world.  Like our Founding Fathers, they are also adamant when it comes to their personal beliefs concerning the spiritual realm and while it is politically correct to tolerate all religions, we know this to be a spirit of antichrist.  (See Epilogue: “Bush to attend UN dialogue on religions”)

Those who are unyielding concerning their beliefs in a “Great Architect of the Universe”, as defined by Freemasonry, or “Liberty as a new secular religion”, then obviously to be adamant in this sense is to be adamantly opposed to the Lord. 

Thomas Jefferson was another Founding Father who was known for being adamant about his beliefs.  Even though he believed that Jesus was a moral man, Jefferson was so adamant in his belief that Jesus was not the Son of God and did not perform the miracles recorded in the New Testament that he deleted all the Scriptures that spoke about the divinity or miracles of Jesus from the Bible.  Jefferson replaced the Bible as we know it today with his own version, which came to be known as the Jefferson Bible.  Needless to say, Jefferson’s heart was hardened against the Lord.

Their hearts were as an Adamant Stone or Diamond Point

Jeremiah 17:1 and Zechariah 7:12 describe the heart condition of those Founding Fathers that were adamant in their beliefs that were opposed to the Lord.   The hearts of the Freemasons, deists, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and many others that were a product of the Age of Enlightenment, were all hardened to the truth that there is only one God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and that Jesus Christ is the truth, the cornerstone and the foundation. 

“The sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron, and with the point of a diamond: it is graven upon the table of their heart, and upon the horns of your altars” (Jeremiah 17:1, KJV, emphasis added)

“Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should hear the law, and the words which the Lord of hosts hath sent in his spirit by the former prophets: therefore came a great wrath from the Lord of hosts.” (Zechariah 7:12, KJV, emphasis added)

Amplified reads: “Yes, they made their hearts as an adamant stone or diamond point …” (Zechariah 7:12, Amplified Bible)

In Scripture, the "adamant stone" and the "diamond" are used interchangeably – both being the hardest of stones. 

America likened to the Adamant Stone – Boundaries in the Shape of a Diamond Define Washington, D.C.

As was the custom of the Founding Fathers, they conveyed their beliefs through symbolism.  Interestingly, George Washington chose a ten mile square in the shape of a “diamond” to identify the boundaries of Washington, D.C., with the Federal City located at approximately the center of the diamond.  Furthermore, he was “adamant” about the boundaries being mapped out exactly as he instructed.

The symbolism of the diamond was to liken America to an "adamant stone" – a country that would be resolute in her beliefs, whatever those beliefs might be.  Like an adamant stone, America would be unmovable, unyielding, unafraid, not dismayed, invincible and unconquerable – right, wrong or indifferent.

 The symbolism conveyed that America was a nation that was adamant in her opinions and for that reason, America would set her face as an adamant stone against any nation that opposed those opinions.  She would set her face as an adamant stone with invincible armed forces whose courage was unshakable with the belief that America would be unconquerable in war.

Even today, like President Bush, many of America’s political leaders are "adamant" in what they believe to be America’s role in the world and in particular concerning their belief that America was obligated to the world for going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Yet, even though America has not been able to accomplish her military goals in Afghanistan and Iraq nor her political goals of establishing a democracy in Iraq, many American politicians are still "adamant" in their attitude that America is "invincible" in war.  While continuing to try and prove that point, America has not only lost the respect of other countries worldwide, but she is no longer seen as a world power to reckon with.

On the other hand, the country that is now a threat in the Mideast, Iran, grew stronger because of America’s occupation of Iraq.  In fact, when America removed Saddam Hussein from power they eliminated one of Iran’s foremost enemies.  America’s inability to accomplish the military victories hoped for in Iraq and Afghanistan has strengthened Iran and is now the threatening presence in the Mideast and with America as well.        

“Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpent's root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent.” (Isa 14:29, KJV)

What has sprung up as a result of the invasion of Iraq is much more a threat to the Mideast and America than Saddam Hussein.  Iran is a more formidable enemy than Iraq was and Iran will not hesitate to attack America or Israel forcefully and with astonishing fierceness. 

It remains to be seen what fruit will be borne from those Iraqi leaders that have taken the place of Saddam Hussein and new leaders to come.  Not until America has removed all their troops from Iraq will the world really know what has sprung forth out of the serpent’s root. 

Even though it appears that the rod of Iraq that struck so many has been broken, it is premature for America or the Mideast to rejoice in the death of Saddam Hussein.  It may be a temporary reprieve, however, the danger for Israel, the Mideast and America still exists – even more so.  Could the future leaders of Iraq prove to be that of a fiery flying serpent – worse than the serpent that was operating behind Hussein?

For example, the American politicians who support America’s role in Iraq have felt pride and elation that because of America’s role in Iraq, the Iraqi people have formed a democratic form of government.  Or have they?  Although there has been much rejoicing and expectancy in Iraq’s upcoming fall elections, due to political disagreements and a power struggle within the Iraqi government the elections have been cancelled, at least for the year 2008.  This postponement was a clear setback for the Bush administration:

“President Jalal Talabani said Wednesday that he would veto a measure governing provincial elections scheduled for this year, … The announcement was a setback for both the Bush administration and the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, which hailed a preliminary election law passed earlier this year as evidence of political progress in Iraq.  The ongoing disagreements over the polling have instead highlighted the sectarian fissures that still divide the country.”[41]

To complicate matters, there have been politically motivated suicide bombings in protest of those elections.[42]

While Isaiah 14:29 is speaking to a specific event, it is also representative of all ages.  Throughout time there has always been men, like President Bush, who believe that they are the leader or conqueror to bring about world peace or to make another nation subject to them.  The motive is neither here or there; the point is that history has proven that these men are only replaced by other men who believe that they will be the one who will be able to do exactly what the other believed he could do, but found out that he could not. 

While America believes that they and they alone can rule the world, history has and will continue to prove them to be wrong.  (See Epilogue; “Financial crisis belies myth of U.S. independence”)

For all America’s rejoicing that Saddam Hussein was brought down, their rejoicing is premature.  From that root will spring a more poisonous viper.  According to Iran’s foreign minister: 

“‘There was a day when the passage of a U.S. warship offshore could change governments – that’s how much people feared the United States,’ … Today, America has 150,000 troops in Iraq and it is unable to provide security for Iraqis or even for its own forces.’ The Iranian diplomat discounted the threat of U.S. or Israeli military action.  Talk of an American attack was just ‘psychological warfare,’ he said. … Paradoxically, perhaps, the Iranians trust American rationality – and are convinced it would be folly for the Bush administration to attack Iran when so many U.S. troops are vulnerable in Iraq and Afghanistan. …”[43]

To prove their point and in spite of warnings from America, Iran test fired their long range missiles in the Persian Gulf in the summer of 2008.  This was to demonstrate to America that they are not afraid of the United States and they can and will defend itself against any attack by the United States or Israel. 

For at least two years, President Bush had been “adamant” that America would not participate in any talks with Iran until they suspended its uranium enrichment program.  Yet, on July 19, 2008, just days after America’s warnings to Iran to stop test firing long range missiles, Iran gained a diplomatic victory when America altered their policy by sending a senior U.S. envoy along with five other countries to the negotiating table with Iran to discuss Iran’s uranium reprocessing program.  This shift in U.S. policy was seen as a weakness even among Americans. 

America’s ability as a nation to lead globally or here at home began to unravel in 2005 in a very unusual and unexpected way.  When Hurricane Katrina ripped into New Orleans, even third world countries were shocked at America’s inability to respond to the crisis.  The overwhelming chaos, lawlessness and unnecessary deaths that occurred in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina took the world by surprise and drew criticism worldwide. 

Nations from around the world not only questioned America’s ability to lead their country when faced with an internal crisis, but many also came to realize that America is not the grandiose country they once thought.  Quite the contrary, America was humiliated and humbled when third world countries as well as countries that America is not on friendly terms with offered to send aid to New Orleans – aid that was not forthcoming from America. 

For example, according to Archbishop Paul Cordes who is the head of the Vatican’s charity organization: 

“‘The weakness experienced by the United States faced with this catastrophe’ serves to ‘destroy all of our beliefs about self-sufficiency,’ the Vatican official said.  ‘Thurs, for me, in the bad part of this event there is also the hope, for many citizens, of seeing that the world is greater than the United States,’ Cordes said.”[44]

The question was asked why so many of New Orleans police force abandoned their duties. 

“Why did so many of his officers leave their posts as the city descended in a chaos that left many residents afraid that either thugs or the elements would kill them?" … "Aaron Broussard, the Jefferson Parish president, told CBS News that the federal government would have to be held accountable for what happened.  'Bureaucracy has murdered people in the greater New Orleans area, and bureaucracy needs to stand trial before Congress today,' Broussard said.”[45]

America was Humiliated and Humbled: people around the world were asking "How Could This Be Happening in the United States?"

“London, September 3 -- People around the world cannot believe what they're seeing.  From Argentina to Zimbabwe, front-page photos of the dead and desperate in New Orleans, almost all of them poor and black, have sickened them and shaken assumptions about American might.  How can this be happening, they ask, in a nation whose wealth and power seem almost supernatural in so many struggling corners of the world? Pick the comparison: New Orleans looks like Haiti, or Baghdad, or Sudan, Bangladesh or Sri Lanka. The images of all the rubble and corpses and empty-eyed survivors remind people of those places, not the United States.”  'Third World America,' declared the headline in the Daily Mail in London on Saturday. 'Law and order is gone, gunmen roam at will, raping and looting, and as people die of heat and thirst, bodies lie rotting in the street. Until now, such a hellish vista could only be imagined in a Third World disaster zone. But this was America yesterday.' ... In a remarkable role reversal, some of the world's poorest developing nations are offering help. El Salvador offered to send soldiers to help restore order,  …  Beyond the goodwill, much of the reaction has been harshly critical of the U.S. response and of Bush, who remains unpopular in many places outside the United States, largely over the war in Iraq. The Independent newspaper in London carried front-page headlines on Saturday that read, "Where was the President in his country's hour of need? And why has it taken him five days to go to New Orleans?" The paper also asked, 'How can the US take Iraq, a country of 25 million people, in three weeks but fail to rescue 25,000 of its own citizens from a sports arena in a big American city?'   …  For the French, who feel greater historical, cultural, linguistic and emotional ties to New Orleans than perhaps any other American city, the daily front-page images have been gut-wrenching. ‘The rage of the forgotten’ declared the headline of Saturday's editions of Liberation newspaper beside a photograph of a young woman on her knees, screaming in despair. Saturday's lead editorial in Le Figaro questioned how the U.S. military could have been so quick to arrive in South Asia for the tsunami, yet 'wasn't able to do the same within its own borders.' … On Chinese Web sites, which have covered the disaster closely, several postings contrasted the Chinese army's relief role in recent floods and earthquakes with the U.S. response in New Orleans. 'Hundreds of thousands of . . . soldiers were sent to those places to help local residents, and they really did a good job," one posting said. ‘But the United States, a superpower, only sent several thousand soldiers to help. What a shame!' … Others said the looting and chaos in New Orleans reflected a culture of violence in the United States. The English-language Times of India on Saturday published a quote from Sajeewa Chinthaka, a 36-year-old from Sri Lanka, where the tsunami killed more than 30,000: 'It's disgusting. Not a single tourist caught in the tsunami was mugged. We can easily see where the civilized part of the world's population is.' … The issue of race underlies much of the global dismay over the situation in New Orleans. … In the Daily Mail of London on Saturday, columnist Anthony Holden … 'Rarely,' he wrote, ‘has such lurid evidence of the darker side of the American dream been so brutally exposed.’”[46] (emphasis added)

Even former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who shares President Bush’s grandiose views of America’s role in the world, criticized the American government for its inability to respond to the citizens of New Orleans when they desperately needed assistance.  For that reason, Gingrich questioned America’s ability to respond to a world crises.

“‘I think it puts into question all of the Homeland Security and Northern Command planning for the last four years, because if we can’t respond faster  than this to an event we saw coming across the Gulf for days, then why do we think we’re prepared to respond to a nuclear or biological attack?’” [47]

The above comments by Mr. Gingrich are interesting given comments he made just six years earlier praising America’s ability and responsibility to lead the world as well as leading here in America.  The following remarks were made by Gingrich during the debate on the resolution supporting the military strikes against Iraq in December 1998.

“I think this resolution offers us a very important opportunity to talk with ourselves and to talk with the world.  The United States represents two enormous burdens that we have to live out:  First, that we are the center of freedom and that we are engaged in the process of self-government.  And Second, that we must carry the burden of leading the world, and that is an operational, day-to-day activity which never suspends.  … And we have an obligation to prove to ourselves and to the world that we can simultaneously govern ourselves in freedom under the rule of law and provide leadership wherever it is needed around the world.  …. The United States has to lead.  There is no alternative.  There is no other country capable of organizing against an Iraqi dictator who wants to get weapons of mass destruction.  There is no other country capable of sustaining freedom against a North Korean dictatorship actively seeking to get nuclear weapons.  There is no other country that can lead the world financial system when it is under stress.  There is no other country capable of bringing together on a global basis, people trying to solve problems." …  "Yes, it would be nice to run and hide. …. But today, in the age of the Internet, in the age of worldwide instantaneous financial communications, in the age of weapons of mass destruction… for the United States to fail to lead is in fact to guarantee chaos and to guarantee pain across the planet and ultimately pain here in the United States.  So let me be very clear.  I believe the United States has to lead, and I believe, as a practical matter, both under our constitution, and in the nature of how human beings function, … We have a chance to say today to the world:  No matter what our constitutional process, whether it is an election eve or it is the eve of a constitutional vote, no matter what our debates at home, we are, as a nation, prepared to lead the world. …. So I rise today to say to Saddam Hussein and any other dictator who has any doubts:  The United States can both govern itself and lead the world simultaneously.  And I say to our allies across the planet, we have been, since 1941, the bulwark on which your freedom was based.  We have been the arsenal on which your freedom has been assured, and we have been the power on which your security has been procured.  We will retain those capabilities, and no matter what the temporary arguments, no matter what the temporary issues, no one anywhere on this planet should doubt the will of the American people to support freedom and the will of the American people to provide leadership and our capacity to subordinate our personalities and subordinate issues to ensure that we as a nation are strong on this planet.’”[48] (emphasis added)

Mr. Gingrich was correct.  For the United States to fail to lead is in fact to guarantee chaos and to guarantee pain across the planet and ultimately, pain here in the United States”.   Mr. Gingrich’s grandiose views of America’s stature in the world have been dispelled, at least to the rest of the world, if not to those American politicians who continue to remain “adamant” in their beliefs.  

It has already been pointed out that General Petraeus, in keeping with America’s grandiose self-perception of America’s role in the world, was welcomed on Capitol Hill with all the pomp of the “Roman Triumph”.  Interestingly, another American hero was received with all the pomp of the Roman Triumph.  He is also portrayed as a god along with the goddess Victory. 

Christopher Columbus

Christopher Columbus’ self-portrayal reveals that like many of America’s Founding Fathers, he too had a certain self perception of his own grandiosity.  The District of Columbia is the namesake of Christopher Columbus and even though he never actually set foot on land that is now known as America, Columbus is one of few men who America has set aside a day to be honored by all Americans.

In an allegorical sketch personally drawn by Columbus, he portrays himself as a god.  Columbus drew this sketch of his “triumphal entry” and upon returning to Spain, Christopher Columbus and his train was received by the King and Queen with all the pomp and ceremony of the “Roman Triumph”.

The following (self) sketch of Christopher Columbus and text are taken from The New Complete History of the United States of America by John Clark Ridpath.[49]  

America celebrates Columbus Day in honor of Christopher Columbus who is credited with the discovery of the New World.  This is perplexing given that the lands he discovered were already inhabited.  Further, the natives who inhabited the New World were not at war with Spain nor was Spain being threatened by them.   

            In his sketch, Columbus portrayed the goddess Victory hovering over him, which is an indication she influenced his desire to be victorious in his endeavors.  The goal of anyone influenced by the goddess Victory becomes blinded to reality.  Their goal is to conquer – to lord it over others.  Neither equality nor righteousness are part of the equation.  Columbus and those who honor him called it discovery.  Others, rightly so, call it “lording it over others”.

It was not unusual for men like Columbus to invoke pagan gods through prayer.  However, his self portrayal would be more than just symbolism to him – he would actually be revealing something about his own beliefs to others.

His sketch with Victory hovering over him indicated that Columbus had invoked Victory to come to his aid and that he believed it was this pagan goddess who brought him victory in battle.  However, anyone influenced by the goddess Victory becomes blinded to what it means to be victorious in the Lord.  Instead, like Columbus, they call evil good and good evil to justify their victories in war and whatever other endeavors they may engage in.   To take land that is already inhabited is not discovery, yet those who honor Columbus call it discovery.  Others recognize that he only discovered people who he was able to “lord over” in order to take their land.

After their victory in battle, Roman generals paraded the people they had conquered along their parade route when they were received with all the pomp of the “Roman Triumph”.  In similar fashion, Christopher Columbus paraded some of the natives from the New World that he had triumphed over when he was received with all the pomp of a “Roman Triumph” when returning to Spain. 

“When Columbus started to Barcelona, the whole population along the way arose to greet him.  His progress became a triumphal pageant.  Curiosity to see and hear overmastered the multitudes.  Their Majesties knew not whether to receive the Admiral as subject or as prince.  A royal canopy was prepared in the open air, and there thrones were placed for the sovereigns.  Ferdinand and Isabella sat side by side.  There Columbus with his train was received and welcomed.  He knelt and kissed the queen’s hand.  It was believed that the discoverer had found the Indies.  The national imagination was inflamed to a fever of extravagant dreams.   Columbus’ story was heard by the sovereigns with the greatest interest.  He was confirmed in all his honors and emoluments.  The court and the hidalgos who surrounded it vied with one another in doing obeisance to the great Admiral.  Several of the natives of the West Indies had been brought home in the train.”[50] (emphasis added)

The Pantheon:  The Capitol’s Dome

We have explored the influence of Rome’s Capitoline Hill, yet we need to look at the Roman Pantheon and its influence on America before leaving this section.  We already know that Thomas Jefferson suggested that the United States Capitol be designed after pagan temples of antiquity to reflect the ideology behind those who built the temples.  As a result, the United States Capitol was designed as a temple after the Roman Panetheon and the temple on Capitoline Hill.  The following quote supports Jefferson’s choice of the Roman Pantheon and reverence for its gods. 

 “Jefferson expressed his preferences in a famous letter he wrote to L’Enfant on April 10, 1791.  He wanted America’s Capitol to be based on ‘some one of the models of antiquity … All of Jefferson’s drawings associated with the Capitol incorporate domed rotundas.  His most developed sketch is for an enlarged version of the Roman Pantheon, a choice he made for symbolic as well as didactic reasons. … yet the grandeur of his conception and his idea of a Pantheon-inspired dome was crucial to the Capitol’s future development. … Designed by the Emperor Hadrian and built in A.D. 117, the Pantheon simultaneously represented Roman civil virtues, typified the rationality and coherence of ancient architecture, and provided a meaningful architectural form to express the union of the states.  The hemispherical geometry of the Pantheon’s dome represented unity, as did its function as the temple dedicated to all the Roman gods; Jefferson’s Capitol was to represent all the American people.”[51] (emphasis added)

The symbolism of the Pantheon and its dome was considered crucial to the design of the US Capitol.  However, the Pantheon was built during the height of the Roman Empire rather than during the republic for which America stood!  Why would Jefferson, who was so meticulous about details, want the symbolism of America’s Capitol linked to that of the Pantheon when the Roman emperors who built the Pantheon favored a form of government that Jefferson was so bitterly against and that was opposed to a republic?          

The answer seems obvious: both the Capitol of the United States and the Pantheon are structures dedicated to honor pagan gods.  Scripture is clear that we are not to learn the way of the heathen (Jeremiah 10).  It is one thing to be aware that paganism exists – it is quite another to learn the ways of the heathen and practice them.  Yet, the icons of pagan gods and their relationship with mankind, as well as the mythology surrounding them, were incorporated into the iconography of the Capitol. 

Furthermore, Jefferson’s Capitol did not represent “All the People”.  There were many who objected to Jefferson’s choice of pagan symbolism to portray America.  Jefferson’s Capitol was a reflection of his own personal religious beliefs and hidden agendas, but was not a reflection of the beliefs of all Americans – then, nor now.   

The Dalai Lama

The satanic spirits that influenced our Founding Fathers continue to influence our lawmakers.  According to Scripture, there is nothing that is hidden that won’t be revealed and there is nothing new today that hasn’t been repeated before.

“Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.  What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light: and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops.” (Matt 10:26-27, KJV)  

and

“The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.” (Eccl 1:9, KJV)

So it was in the year 2007.  America’s lawmakers demonstrated that they too, like their predecessors, are “Most Religious and Very Reverent to Demons”.  On October 17, 2007, the Dalai Lama, referred to as “His Holiness” by both members of Congress and President Bush, received the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest civilian honor the legislative body of America can bestow.  Not only did President Bush refer to a man believed to be an incarnation of a heavenly being, like other Dalai Lamas, as “His Holiness”, but President Bush also acknowledged his own personal toleration of all religions.

As a Christian, President Bush is to be an ambassador for Jesus Christ.  Yet Bush’s remarks at the presentation clearly reveal that he is an ambassador for all religions.

“O You poor and silly and thoughtless and unreflecting and senseless Galatians!  Who has fascinated or bewitched or cast a spell over, unto whom – right before your very eyes – Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was openly and graphically set forth and portrayed as crucified?” (Gal 3:1, Amplified Bible)

While President Bush may be politically correct, he is misleading those of other faiths.  Scripture tells us that the way and the only way to the Father is through his Son, Jesus Christ, and as a Christian we are to stand on that truth.   

“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6, KJV)

The world’s way is toleration; however, Jesus is more interested that no one perishes.  Am I intolerant?  Yes, I am intolerant of anything other than the truth because I am more interested in others salvation.  In Acts 1:8, Jesus commands us to be a “witness unto Him”, unto the uttermost part of the earth.  The truth is that Jesus Christ is the way and the only way.  If I truly believe that, then why would I not want others who are perishing to know the truth.  

The following are excerpts from President Bush’s remarks at the joint Congressional ceremony honoring the Dalai Lama.  They leave no doubt as to what he believes America’s Founding Fathers meant by religious freedom and leave no doubt that President Bush is “Most Religious”.

“THE PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker; … members of the congressional delegation, … and Your Holiness [the Dalai Lama].   Over the years, Congress has conferred the Gold Medal on many great figures in history – usually at a time when their struggles were over and won.  Today Congress has chosen to do something different.  It has conferred this honor on a figure whose work continues – and whose outcome remains uncertain.  In so doing, America raises its voice in the call for religious liberty and basic human rights.  These values forged our Republic.  They sustained us through many trials.  And they draw us by conviction and conscience to the people of Tibet and the man we honor today. … Members of both of our political parties and world leaders have seen His Holiness as a man of faith and sincerity and peace.  He’s won the respect and affection of the American people – and America has earned his respect and affection, as well. … Jefferson counted as one of America’s greatest blessings the freedom of worship.  It was, he said, ‘a liberty deemed in other countries incompatible with good government, and yet proved by our experience to be its best support.’  The freedom of belief is a yearning of the human spirit, a blessing offered to the world, and a cherished value of our nation.  It’s the very first protection offered in the American Bill of Rights.  It inspired many of the leaders that this rotunda honors in portraits and in marble.  And it still defines our way of life.  Consider where we gather today.  This great symbol [the US Capitol] of democracy sits quietly near a Catholic parish, a Jewish synagogue, a Muslim community center, a Greek Orthodox cathedral, and a Buddhist temple – each with faithful followers who practice their deeply held beliefs and live side by side in peace.  This diversity is not a source of instability – it’s a source of strength.  (Applause.)  This freedom does not belong to one nation – it belongs to the world.  … Throughout our history, we have stood proudly with those who offer a message of hope and freedom to the world’s downtrodden and oppressed.  This is why all of us are drawn to a noble and spiritual leader who lives a world away.  Today we honor him as a universal symbol of peace and tolerance, a shepherd for the faithful, and the keeper of the flame for his people.  I congratulate His Holiness on this recognition.  I’m so honored to be here with you, sir.  Laura and I join all Americans in offering the people of Tibet our fervent prayer that they may find days of prosperity and peace.”[52] (emphasis added)

            Knowingly or unknowingly, President Bush’s words, while “most religious”, reflect a reverence for demons.  Scripture clearly rejects the ideology of either incarnation (other than Jesus Christ) or reincarnation, yet the followers of Dalai Lama believe him to be a reincarnation of the original Dalai Lama who was the incarnation of a heavenly being.  This spiritual deity supposedly has been incarnate through all the other Dalai Lamas and will be incarnate in a baby who will be born on the 49^th day after the present Dalai Lama, who received the Congressional Gold Medal, passes away. 

We know from Scripture that demons can indwell human beings, and when they do, they will stay unless they are cast out.  In other words, what many believe to be the continuing incarnation of a spiritual or heavenly being through the birth of a child when a Dalai Lama passes away is nothing more than a demonic spirit.  The spirit, known as a familiar spirit, leaves the body of the Dalai Lama at his death and finds a child born on the 49^th day after his death to indwell. 

As mentioned earlier in this section, the pagan belief that the gods had human representatives on this earth is not a new concept.  As also mentioned earlier, George Washington was portrayed as the earthly representative of a deity (Jupiter/Mithra).  Ironically, the Dalai Lama received the Congressional Gold Medal underneath the very mural portraying George Washington as a pagan deity.  Given these facts, we should not be surprised that America’s civil leaders would embrace the Dalai Lama, who is also believed to be an earthly representative of a heavenly being. 

There truly is nothing new under the sun – what has been will be again.  Scripture is clear that we are not to learn the way of the heathen.  It is one thing to be aware that paganism exists – it is quite another to learn the ways of the heathen and honor those who practice them.

A Spirit of Confusion

At times and in other articles, it may seem contradictory that George Washington symbolized this or that.  However, as a Freemason, what he believed in, who is was, who he was not and what he stood for was multifaceted.  That is why they used iconography to communicate – to reveal “and conceal” – and to confuse.

Iconography was meant to be confusing – the images at the United States Capitol are nothing but confusion.  “Behold, they are all vanity; their works are nothing: their molten images are wind and confusion.” (Isa 41:29, KJV, emphasis added)  However, according to Scripture, it is the spirits operating behind the images that will eventually be confused!

“Declare ye among the nations, and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and conceal not: say, Babylon is taken, Bel is confounded, Merodach is broken in pieces; her idols are confounded, her images are broken in pieces.” (Jer 50:2, KJV, emphasis added)

When America’s Founding Fathers failed to clarify the identity of God, a door was left open for a spirit of confusion to operate.  Many Americans believe that our Founding Fathers were Christians – others believe that they were not.  This confusion over who they were and who they were not has resulted in confusion as to how to interpret the Constitution regarding church and state.

The following quote from Morals and Dogma makes it clear that Freemasons understood that the words spoken by Freemasons regarding religion did not inform others of what that word meant to them.   Pike states that:

“All religious expression is symbolism … To present a visible symbol to the eye of another is not necessarily to inform him of the meaning which that symbol has to you. … For as with the visible symbol, so with the word:  to utter it to you does not inform you of the exact meaning which it has to me; …” [53]  (emphasis added)

The Apostle Paul explained that this type of communication is according to the world and that as Christians we are not to communicate in this way.  We are to let our yes mean yes and our no mean no.  Our communication is not to be left open to interpretation where it can mean more than one thing.  Our communication, regardless of the manner in which we communicate, should be such that a spirit of confusion cannot operate. 

Let your yes be yes and your no be no

“Now because I changed my original plan, was I being unstable and capricious?  Or what I plan, do I plan according to the flesh [like a worldly man], ready to say Yes, yes, [when it may mean] No, no?  ^[18] As surely as God is trustworthy and faithful and means what He says, our speech and message to you have not been Yes [that might mean] No.  ^[19] For the Son of God, Christ Jesus (the Messiah), Who has been preached among you by us, by myself, Silvanus, and Timothy, was not Yes and No; but in Him is [always the divine] Yes.  ^[20] For as many as are the promises of God, they all find their Yes [answer] in Him [Christ].  For this reason we also utter the Amen (so be it) to God through Him [in His Person and by His agency] to the glory of God.” (2Cor 1:17-20, Amplified Bible)

Self-Glorification

            A “famous” or “great” man does not mean that he is a “righteous” man.  Rather than boast in the Lord, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are only two among a long list of America’s leaders who, like King Saul (1Sam 15:12), set up monuments in honor of themselves and their secular victories.

“However, let him who boasts and glories boast and glory in the Lord.  For [it is] not [the man] who praises and commends himself who  is approved and accepted, but [it is the person] whom the Lord accredits and commends.” (2Cor 10:17-18, Amplified Bible)

Sadly, today’s political leaders as well as Americans in general are just as eager to set up monuments in honor of themselves and America as were our forefathers.

In Conclusion: 

America’s Founding Fathers concept of Liberty is a fallacy.  America’s ideology of liberty is liberty apart from the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and because of that, Americans in general as well as politicians have become blinded to the true meaning of liberty.   It was their concept of Liberty that many Americans embraced and like the Founding Fathers, they too have become enslaved to this deceptive liberty.

·         America’s Ideology of Liberty is a form of “idolatry”

·         America’s Founding Fathers were “superstitious”, “most religious” and very “reverent to demons”

Like the Athenians, America’s Founding Fathers were “most religious and very reverent to demons”.  And those beliefs included incorporating the images and objects of worship associated with those deities into the iconography of the United States Capitol as well as the design of the Capitol itself.

“Now while Paul was awaiting them at Athens, his spirit was grieved and roused to anger as he saw that the city was full of idols. … So Paul standing in the center of the Areopagus [Mars Hill meeting place], said:  Men of Athens, I perceive in every way [on every hand and with every turn I make] that you are most religious or very reverent to demons.  For as I passed along and carefully observed your objects of worship, I came also upon an altar with this inscription, To the unknown god.  Now what you are already worshipping as unknown, this I set forth to you.” (Acts 17: 16, 22-23, Amplified Bible, emphasis added)

In verse 22, the King James version of the Bible reads, “I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious”.  The word “superstitious”, according to Strong’s Concordance (G1174) is the compound of a derivative of the base of G1169 and means to be “more religious than others – too superstitious”.  Superstitious, according to Strong’s G1169  means “timid, i.e. by implication faithless:  fearful, and superstitious, verse 22, is referring to a demon or supernatural spirit of a bad nature: a devil.

In other words, it is a demonic spirit operating behind superstition and it is this spirit operating behind the concept of “Liberty” and religious freedom.  America’s politicians may be “awe-inspired” that America is a nation that embraces religious freedom, yet their PRIDE is idolatry – and pride goes before the fall.

Liberty is not about “democracy” or “religious freedom” – it’s about Jesus Christ setting the captives free!  We are not at liberty to tolerate and embrace the customs of other religions – we are to be Ambassadors for Jesus Christ who is “the way” and the only way to God the Father.     

Jesus Christ is the “Perfect Law of Liberty” (James 2:12, 1:25).  “Liberty” is not about being liberated from Christianity – it’s about Jesus Christ “liberating” those in captivity. 

Secular Religion is on the Rise Again

Biblically we know that there is nothing new under the sun and what once was will be again (Ecclesiastes 1:9).  Revelation 17:8 echoes the same Biblical principle:  even though the beast that once was is not presently evident, it will once again make its presence known.  So it is with “Secular Religion”. 

The manifestations of secular religion were not as obvious in our parents and grandparents generation as it was when America’s forefathers wrote the Constitution.  However, in our generation, secular religion is on the rise.  Further, the manifestations of the principality behind secular religion in America are becoming more and more evident and widespread. 

For example, on August 16, 2008 Pastor Rick Warren hosted a “civil forum” at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California where he is the senior pastor.  In doing so, he distorted both the Biblical and constitutional boundaries between church and state.  This civil forum was designed to ask both presumptive nominees for president, John McCain and Barrack Obama, questions concerning their faith and politics more from a secular perspective rather than just a Christian perspective.  However, the focus should be placed on Warren’s motives and role in the civil forum rather than on the politicians. 

Warren stated that while he believes in the constitutional separation of church and state, he does not believe in a separation of faith and politics.[54]  Obviously, the civil forum is at odds with his belief that there is a constitutional separation of church and state”.  So, what does Warren actually believe? 

The Apostle Paul taught that we are not to speak in such a “worldly manner”.  Rather, as Christians, we are to let our yes be yes and our no be no:  

“Now because I changed my original plan, was I being unstable and capricious?  Or what I plan, do I plan according to the flesh [like a worldly man], ready to say Yes, yes, [when it may mean] No, no?  As surely as God is trustworthy and faithful and means what He says, our speech and message to you have not been Yes [that might mean] No.” (2Cor 1:17-18, Amplified Bible)

It would be hard to know what Warren really believes concerning the separation of church and state if it had not been for the civil forum that he initiated and made all the arrangements for, including the use of his church as the meeting place.  Actions speak louder than words – Warren’s civil forum not only echoes his belief that there is no separation of faith and politics – the civil forum also clearly revealed that contrary to what he says, he does not believe in the separation of church and state either.       

Like Warren, America’s founding fathers also said yes and no at the same time making it almost impossible to know what they meant concerning the separation of church and state.  No one can deny that there is confusion as to what the Founding Fathers really meant concerning the separation of church and state.  History bears witness that whatever they meant, it has proven to be controversial, questionable and disputable.  Otherwise, it would not be necessary for the Supreme Court to continually interpret the Constitution, nor would their interpretations be apt to change as new Supreme Court justices are appointed.

Anything other than an unequivocal yes or no is in the middle.  This middle ground allows a spirit of Leviathan and confusion to operate.  Because the middle ground is neither a clear yes or no, it can be interpreted in more than one way.  For that reason, the statement becomes controversial, questionable and disputable.     

For example, prior to being interviewed, were the presidential candidates in a “cone of silence” as Warren guaranteed they would be – or not?  Once again, like the worldly man, we find that Warren’s yes really meant no. 

Since both candidates would be asked the same questions, Warren guaranteed both candidates that while he was interviewing the first candidate, the other candidate would be sequestered in a “cone of silence” where they could not hear the response of their opponent.  This guarantee was to ensure that the second candidate to be interviewed would not have an advantage over the first candidate by being able to prepare his answers in advance.

            Even though this guarantee was stated by Warren to the televised audience, with McCain concurring, McCain was not in a “cone of silence”.  While Obama was being interviewed, McCain was in a motorcade on his way to the interview with the availability of both a radio and other necessary technology that could be used to pass on to McCain information that could help him to prepare for his interview.  For instance, McCain aides who were in the audience as Warren interviewed Obama could easily have used their blackberries to pass on to McCain the questions that he would be asked.  Obviously, this fact puts into question the creditability of both Warren and the civil forum.

Nonetheless, to those who don’t really care one way or another, including the carnal Christian as well as the public in general, Warren’s approach to religion and politics was considered brilliant!  The following quotes are from an article in Time Magazine reads in part:  “Why Religion in America will never be the same”: 

“A shift away from ‘sin issues’ – like abortion and gay marriage – is reflected in Warren’s approach to his coming sit-downs with the candidates.  He says he is more interested in questions that he feels are ‘uniting,’ such as ‘poverty, HIV/AIDS, climate change and human rights,’ and still more in civics-class topics like the candidates’ understanding of the role of the Constitution.  There will be no ‘Christian religion test,’ Warren insists.  ‘I want what’s good for everybody, not just what’s good for me.  Who’s the best for the nation right now?’” [55] (emphasis added)      

When all three men placed Christianity in a civil forum, they gave the unbeliever the right to judge them, their faith and their motives for participating in the forum.  Interestingly, after the debate, journalists and analysts alike took it upon themselves to determine who won the debate:  Obama or McCain.  Likewise, Warren’s motives have been questioned – and rightly so. 

Warren’s civil forum made a spectacle of Christians to the whole world.  McCain and Obama were like two men on display in an arena who are condemned to fight to the death (1 Corinthians 4:9).  Warren, McCain, and Obama’s participation in the civil forum misrepresents Christianity and Jesus Christ.  “Christianity” is not a “civil religion”.  Just as the Pharisees manipulated the Roman Government to promote their agenda in crucifying Jesus Christ, Rick Warren is using the Civil Government to promote his own agenda.   

Were McCain and Obama promoting their own agendas as well?  Is that why they too were willing to say yes and no at the same time to win the evangelical vote yet not loose the vote of those who believe differently than evangelicals?

When asked when life began, John McCain gained the approval of those in attendance at the civil forum when he was unequivocal in his response that life began at conception.  Yet, within no more than three days, many people were confused when they found out that in another interview that McCain stated that is willing to work with those who favor abortion rights.  The following excerpts are from a Washington Post article titled, “Candidates’ Abortion Views Not So Simple”: [56]

“McCain’s performance at the forum seemed to hearten many conservatives, not only because of his firm, uncompromising stand against abortion but his broader appeals on global warming, genocide and the embrace of causes greater than self.  But the clarity that McCain exhibited at Saddleback has been somewhat diminished with his suggestion that his running mate might favor abortion rights.  ‘Since Saturday night, I’ve seen a lot of confusion in the younger Christian voting bloc because they thought they had figured this thing out,’ said Cameron Strang, editor of Relevant magazine, which is aimed at a new generation of evangelicals.”…“At Saddleback, McCain won plaudits from conservatives when he said that life begins ‘at the moment of conception,’ … But the inroads McCain made are now threatened by his flirtation with a running mate who supports abortion rights.  ‘I think that the pro-life position is one of the important aspects or fundamentals of the Republican Party.  And I also feel that – and I’m not trying to equivocate here – that Americans want us to work together,’ McCain told the Weekly Standard.” (emphasis added)

From the same article:  “Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, charged that Obama is trying to have it both ways because the Illinois bill he opposed was virtually identical to the federal law he said he would support.”

The above examples are excellent illustrations of people who say yes and no at the same time to protect their own interests and further their own agenda, and in this case, to win the votes of both those who are pro-life and pro-abortion.  The confusion that has resulted is the fruit that is produced from those who plan according to the flesh and like a worldly man, they are ready to say yes when it may mean no – if it is to their advantage.

So, what are we to believe?  No one really knows – and that’s the whole point. 

Warren’s secular perspective on Christianity is not new.  Those analysts who believe Warren’s civil forum sets a new standard for Christianity and that religion in America will never be the same are only witnessing “Liberty”, raising her head once again in a form acceptable to the American’s of 2008. 

            Just as the Lord revealed to Elijah that He had 7,000 others who had not bowed the knee to Baal, the Lord has 7,000 in America who will not bow their knee to the Baal of Secular Religion.  These 7,000 will not misrepresent Christianity.  They are always truthful: their message is not yes and no, it is yes and Amen in Jesus Christ.

Praise the Lord!

© Gwen Thomas, October 2007/July 2008/November 2008

Epilogue

“Bush to attend UN dialogue on religions”

The following quotes are from the article entitled, “Bush to attend UN dialogue on religions” found on the Washington Post website (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/31/AR2008103103402.html) as originally reported on October 31, 2008 by Edith M. Lederer of the Associated Press. 

“President Bush will join several other world leaders at a General Assembly meeting to promote a global dialogue about religions, cultures and common values, U.N. and U.S. officials said Friday. The meeting is a follow-up to an interfaith conference in Madrid organized by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and King Juan Carlos of Spain in July which brought together Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and representatives of other religions and sparked hopes of a new relationship among religions. … White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Bush ‘remains committed to fostering interfaith harmony among all religions, both at home and abroad.’  She said Bush also plans to meet separately with Abdullah. … Abdullah, whose country bans non-Muslims from openly practicing their religion, has called for religious tolerance and said such dialogue is  the duty of every human being.”

“Financial crisis belies myth of U.S. independence”

The following quotes are from the Analysis/Opinion page (A4) of the October 30, 2008 edition of the Washington Times newspaper written by Edward Goldberg: “Financial crisis belies myth of U.S. independence”.  Shortly after the above article on Liberty was published, the global financial meltdown began exposing the weaknesses and folly of America’s political and economic systems and illustrating just how dependent America is on the world economy.  Below are selected quotes from this article.

“The ongoing financial crisis defines globalization, good or bad.  It is a clear demonstration of how money flows have surpassed the power of individual countries to govern them. … From the beginning of his administration, Mr. Bush has been implying that America is not part of the larger world, that it is exceptional and therefore above it all … his administration has served notice that America is separate and special … The Bush-McCain myth of exceptionalism cannot shield the United States from the super joint economic veto now demanded by the market forces of globalization – a demand created by the administration’s lack of economic confidence in dealing with the American economy.  How ironic … that the administration was compelled by the forces of globalization to follow the lead of a perceived weak Europe to deal with the banking crisis. … Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. was forced to do an immediate about-face.  Globalization, acting in conjunction with realistic European leadership, forced Mr. Paulson’s hand.  When the Europeans decided to inject money into their banks by buying bank shares, Mr. Paulson had no choice but to follow their lead. … The financial crisis has pressured Mr. Bush to move belatedly from dogma to practicality and to confront the reality that America is part of the globalized world.  But tragically, as in so many other areas of his administration, realism follows only after the deluge.”

Bibliography

Allen, William C. History of the United States Capitol. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2001

Architect of the Capitol. Art in the United States Capitol. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1976

Banks, Adelle M. and Burke, Daniel. “Pastors Focus On Faith, Morals In Private Meeting”, The Washington Post. 21 June 2008

Claudy, Carl. Washington’s Home and Fraternal Life, pamphlet no. 14, Washington, DC: United States George Washington Bicentennial Commission, 1931

CNN Website, “Pope’s Katrina envoy:  ‘Shameful’ poverty in U.S.”, 17 September 2005, http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/17/katrina.pope.ap/index.html

Federal News Service. “We Must Carry the Burden”, The Washington Post. 18 December 1998

Fryd, Vivien. Art & Empire. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992

Hislop, Alexander. The Two Babylons, 2^nd Amer. ed. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1959

Hutchens, Rex R. A Glossary To Morals and Dogma. Anderson, SC: Electric City Printing, 1993

Ignatius, David. “Tehran’s Definite Maybe”, The Washington Post, 10 July 10, 2008

Lossing, Benson. Mount Vernon and Its Associations. NY: W.A. Townsend, 1859

Loven, Jennifer. “Bush Tours Katrina Damage Amid Criticism” AP Online Website. 2 September 2005

Meacham, Jon. “A New American Holy War”, Newsweek. 17 December 2007

Paley, Amit R. “Iraqi President Vows Veto of Election Bill”, Washington Post Website, 24 July 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/23/AR2008072301978.html?nav=hcmodule

Parker, Kathleen. “Pastor Rick’s Test”, The Washington Post. 20 August 2008

Pierre, Robert E. “New Orleans Mayor Faces Tough Questions”, The Washington Post. 10 September 2005

Pike, Albert. Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. Charleston: prepared for the Supreme Council of the Thirty Third Degree for the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States, 1871

Raghavan, Sudarsan.“Four Women Kill Dozens in Suicide Blasts in Iraq”, Washington Post Website. 29 July 2008, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/28/AR2008072800169.html?hpid=topnews

Ridpath, John Clark.  The New Complete History of the United States of America. Cincinnati: Jones Brothers Publishing, 1913

Scott, Pamela. Temple of Liberty. NY: Oxford University Press, 1995

Sullivan, Kevin. “How Could This Be Happening in the United States?”, The Washington Post, 4 September 2005

Van Biema, David. “The Global Ambition of Rick Warren”, Time. 18 August 2008

Weisman, Jonathan. “Candidates’ Abortion Views Not So Simple”, The Washington Post. 20 August 2008

White House Website. “President Bush Attends Congressional Gold Medal Ceremony Honoring the Dalai Lama”. 17 October 2007, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20071017-3.html

Williams, Krissah. “Focus on the Family Leader Criticizes Obama Speech”, The Washington Post. 25 June 2008

Wilson, James Grant and Fiske, John. Cyclopaedia of American Biography. New York: D. Appleton, 1894

Wolanin, Barbara A. prepared under the direction of the Architect of the Capitol. Constantino Brumidi: Artist of the Capitol. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1998

Woodward, Bob. “A Course of Confident Action”, The Washington Post. 19 November 2002

Scripture quotations taken from The AMPLIFIED BIBLE, Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation.  All rights reserved. Used by permission. (www.Lockman.org)

Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION^®. Copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society.  Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved. 

The “NIV” and “New International Version” trademarks are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by International Bible Society.  Use of either trademark requires the permission of International Bible Society.

Endnotes